I've read up on recent goings-on in the scheduler subgroup, and have some
thoughts to contribute.
But first I must admit that I am still a newbie to OpenStack, and still am
missing some important clues. One thing that mystifies me is this: I see
essentially the same thing, which I have general
AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: [openstack-dev] [heat] [scheduler] Bringing things together for
Icehouse
I've read up on recent goings-on in the scheduler subgroup, and have some
thoughts to contribute.
But first I must admit
> From: Gary Kotton
> ...
> Can you please join us at the up and coming scheduler meeting. That
> will give you a chance to bring up the idea's and discuss them with
> a larger audience.
I will do so on Sep 17. Later meetings still TBD.
Regards,
Mike___
I have written a brief document, with pictures. See
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hQQGHId-z1A5LOipnBXFhsU3VAMQdSe-UXvL4VPY4ps
Regards,
Mike___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman
penstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] [scheduler] Bringing things together for
Icehouse
I have written a brief document, with pictures. See
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hQQGHId-z1A5LOipnBXFhsU3VAMQdSe-UXvL4VPY
Fixed, sorry.
From: Gary Kotton
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
,
Date: 09/17/2013 03:26 AM
Subject:Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] [scheduler] Bringing things
together for Icehouse
Hi,
The document is locked.
Thanks
Gary
From: Mike Spreitzer
Reply-To: OpenStack
_
From: Mike Spreitzer [mailto:mspre...@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Dienstag, 17. September 2013 07:00
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] [scheduler] Bringing things together for
Icehouse
I have written a brief document, with pictures. Se
Manuel, and others:
I am sorry, in the rush at the end of the scheduler meeting a critical
fact flew from my mind: the material I distributed beforehand was intended
as something I could reference during discussion in the meeting, I did not
expect it to fully stand on its own. Indeed, you have
I have written a new outline of my thoughts, you can find it at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RV_kN2Io4dotxZREGEks9DM0Ih_trFZ-PipVDdzxq_E
It is intended to stand up better to independent study. However, it is
still just an outline. I am still learning about stuff going on in
OpenStack,
Hi Mike,
I have a *slightly* better idea of the kind of stuff you're talking about,
but I think it would really help if you could include some concrete
real-world use cases and describe why a holistic scheduler inside of Heat
is necessary for solving them.
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 2:13 AM, Mike S
On 15/09/13 09:19, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
But first I must admit that I am still a newbie to OpenStack, and still
am missing some important clues. One thing that mystifies me is this: I
see essentially the same thing, which I have generally taken to calling
holistic scheduling, discussed in two m
I think this picture is relevant to Heat context:
https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Y_yyIpql5_cdC8116XrBHzn6GfP_g0NHTTG_W4o
0R9U/edit
As more and more types of compute (containers, VMs, bare metal) and other
resources (geographically dispersed) become available from the cloud with
boarder capa
Excerpts from Keith Bray's message of 2013-09-23 12:22:16 -0700:
>
> I think this picture is relevant to Heat context:
> https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Y_yyIpql5_cdC8116XrBHzn6GfP_g0NHTTG_W4o
> 0R9U/edit
>
>
> As more and more types of compute (containers, VMs, bare metal) and other
> resou
I was not trying to raise issues of geographic dispersion and other higher
level structures, I think the issues I am trying to raise are relevant
even without them. This is not to deny the importance, or relevance, of
higher levels of structure. But I would like to first respond to the
discus
Someone earlier asked for greater clarity about infrastructure
orchestration, so here is my view. I see two main issues: (1) deciding
the order in which to do things, and (2) doing them in an acceptable
order. That's an oversimplified wording because, in general, some
parallelism is possible.
Excerpts from Mike Spreitzer's message of 2013-09-23 20:31:32 -0700:
> I was not trying to raise issues of geographic dispersion and other higher
> level structures, I think the issues I am trying to raise are relevant
> even without them. This is not to deny the importance, or relevance, of
>
On 24/09/13 05:31, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
I was not trying to raise issues of geographic dispersion and other
higher level structures, I think the issues I am trying to raise are
relevant even without them. This is not to deny the importance, or
relevance, of higher levels of structure. But I wo
Joining the party late :)
I think there have been a lot of interesting ideas around wholistic
scheduling over the last few summits. However seems there is no clear
agreement on 1) where it should be specified and implemented 2) what
the specifications look like - VRT, policies, templates etc etc e
Debo, Yathi: I have read
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IiPI0sfaWb1bdYiMWzAAx0HYR6UqzOan_Utgml5W1HI/edit?pli=1
and most of the referenced materials, and I have a couple of big-picture
questions. That document talks about making Nova call out to something
that makes the sort of smart deci
Hi Mike
We understand your point, and, academically, we agree to a large
extent. We aware of the optimization results for holistic placement
etc (and how any realistic formulation is hard). When we look at the
scheduler today, it does one thing at a time because it was meant to
be pragmatic when i
Let me elaborate a little on my thoughts about software orchestration, and
respond to the recent mails from Zane and Debo. I have expanded my
picture at
https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Y_yyIpql5_cdC8116XrBHzn6GfP_g0NHTTG_W4o0R9U
and added a companion picture at
https://docs.google.com/dra
Excerpts from Mike Spreitzer's message of 2013-09-24 22:03:21 -0700:
> Let me elaborate a little on my thoughts about software orchestration, and
> respond to the recent mails from Zane and Debo. I have expanded my
> picture at
> https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Y_yyIpql5_cdC8116XrBHzn6GfP_g
Clint Byrum wrote on 25.09.2013 08:46:57:
> From: Clint Byrum
> To: openstack-dev ,
> Date: 25.09.2013 08:48
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] [scheduler] Bringing things
> together for Icehouse (now featuring software orchestration)
>
> Excerpts from Mike Spreitzer&#x
Clint wrote:
> There is a third stealth-objective that CFN has caused to linger in
> Heat. That is "packaging cloud applications". By allowing the 100%
> concrete CFN template to stand alone, users can "ship" the template.
>
> IMO this marrying of software assembly, config, and orchestration is a
Excerpts from Thomas Spatzier's message of 2013-09-25 00:59:44 -0700:
> Clint Byrum wrote on 25.09.2013 08:46:57:
> > From: Clint Byrum
> > To: openstack-dev ,
> > Date: 25.09.2013 08:48
> > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] [scheduler] Bringing things
> >
Excerpt from Clint's mail on 25.09.2013 22:23:07:
>
> I think we already have some summit suggestions for discussing HOT,
> it would be good to come prepared with some visions for the future
> of HOT so that we can hash these things out, so I'd like to see this
> discussion continue.
Absolutely!
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:04:54PM +0200, Thomas Spatzier wrote:
> Excerpt from Clint's mail on 25.09.2013 22:23:07:
>
> >
> > I think we already have some summit suggestions for discussing HOT,
> > it would be good to come prepared with some visions for the future
> > of HOT so that we can hash t
On 25/09/13 07:03, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
Zane wrote:
> To take the first example, wouldn't your holistic scheduler
effectively have
> to reserve a compute instance and some directly attached block
storage prior
> to actually creating them? Have you considered Climate rather than
Heat as
> an
Zane Bitter wrote on 09/27/2013 08:24:49 AM:
> Your diagrams clearly show scheduling happening in a separate stage to
> (infrastructure) orchestration, which is to say that at the point where
> resources are scheduled, their actual creation is in the *future*.
>
> I am not a Climate expert, bu
Sorry, I was a bit too hasty in writing the last part of my last message;
I forgot to qualify "software orchestration" to indicate I am speaking
only of its preparatory phase. I should have written:
Zane Bitter wrote on 09/27/2013 08:24:49 AM:
...
> If I understood your remarks correctly, we
Hi,
I am working on the OpenStack project Murano which actually had to solve
the same problem with software level orchestration. Right now Murano has a
DSL language which allows you to define a workflow for a complex service
deployment.
Murano uses Heat for infrastructure managements and actually
Excerpts from Georgy Okrokvertskhov's message of 2013-09-30 11:44:26 -0700:
> Hi,
>
> I am working on the OpenStack project Murano which actually had to solve
> the same problem with software level orchestration. Right now Murano has a
> DSL language which allows you to define a workflow for a com
On 1 October 2013 19:31, Clint Byrum wrote:
> TripleO meets at 2000 UTC every Tuesday.
1900UTC.
:)
-Rob
--
Robert Collins
Distinguished Technologist
HP Converged Cloud
___
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.op
Hi Mike and Zane,
Le 27/09/2013 15:58, Mike Spreitzer a écrit :
Zane Bitter wrote on 09/27/2013 08:24:49 AM:
> Your diagrams clearly show scheduling happening in a separate stage to
> (infrastructure) orchestration, which is to say that at the point where
> resources are scheduled, their actua
Clint Byrum wrote on 01.10.2013 08:31:44 - Excerpt:
> From: Clint Byrum
> To: openstack-dev ,
> Date: 01.10.2013 08:33
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [heat] [scheduler] Bringing things
> together for Icehouse (now featuring software orchestration)
>
> Excerpts from Ge
FYI, I have refined my pictures at
https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Y_yyIpql5_cdC8116XrBHzn6GfP_g0NHTTG_W4o0R9U
and
https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1TCfNwzH_NBnx3bNz-GQQ1bRVgBpJdstpu0lH_TONw6g
to hopefully make it clearer that I agree with the sentiment that holistic
infrastructure sched
36 matches
Mail list logo
